This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jrockley (talk | contribs) at 17:05, 22 February 2007 (Featured article categories). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:05, 22 February 2007 by Jrockley (talk | contribs) (Featured article categories)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Travel through March 5th
If you want me to look at an article, please provide the link.
To leave me a message, click here.
Thank you
for re-structuring the Hinduism talk page templates. Much appreciated. Gizza 05:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Bot work
I guess you want to get a bunch ready before you go on travel. It takes longer to process the formerFA templates due to the page moving, and there are 800 or so articles with {{featured}}. Then I suppose I'll go through the articles with {{formerFA}}, {{formerFA2}}, {{farcfailed}}, {{FARpassed}} and variations. Speaking of which, I noticed someone already created a redirect to the ArticleHistory template - another thing for code to look out for. Still finding hidden things from curious links in the archives, which slows things down. The page info generated before was filtered so it had a good concentration of FA-related pages. Other versions with less filtering had 1400 and 900 pages. The latter is probably a reasonable estimate of the FAC pages not linked on appropriate talk pages, but includes about 100 redirects in the WP:FAC prefix. Gimmetrow 11:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Refs
If you get a chance before you jet off, could you have a quick look at the refs for Red Barn Murder. I'm planning on putting up for FAC and this is the first one I've done that has been sourced mostly from books rather than the web. Cheers, Yomangani 12:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Very sensible idea. Done. Yomangani 14:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done that too. I used to have the footnote dates linked on all my articles by using accessdate=date month|accessyear=year but people kept changing them to accessdaymonth= instead (which is not linked), so I eventually caved in and started putting that, and now it appears they want them linked anyway...bit annoying. Yomangani 16:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Very sensible idea. Done. Yomangani 14:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:West Indian cricket team in England in 1988
Thanks for tidying the boxes. Should the current status be logged as FA candidate? --Dweller 14:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
George Calvert
Thanks for correcting my errors on the talk page. It's my first time nominating for FAC. - Mocko13 01:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for fixing the banners on Talk:Go (board game). I was going to ask you to do it, but I didn't think it was important enough. --Ideogram 04:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Pashtun people
I moved all the categories in the article to Category:Pashtun people. You can find them there. I'll try to follow the rest of your advice as well. Thanks, Khoikhoi 11:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Speaking of which, can you respond as to whether your vote on the article has changed or not? I've made significant changes and have addressed the issues others raised in addition to yourself and would appreciate your further input and whether you believe it can be featured again. Thanks and take care. Tombseye 21:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Kakapo
Hey; I'm still a little worried about Kakapo. — Deckiller 13:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. It's been fun :) Your work was extremely instrumental in turning it around though. — Deckiller 14:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
The Bot
Humph. There's no point to the thing if it'll be constantly stalling. Gimmebot, however, has fast become one of my best friends. Perhaps Gimme would look after Jmaxbot, but I'm not sure the traditions regarding bot "ownership."
I'm off at RfA, BTW. Not stumping (at least not yet! ;). But you did ask for a notification. Marskell 14:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- BanyanTree (talk · contribs) has put in a query to Jmax- (talk · contribs); not sure of the protocol either. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think the V1.0 bot could be made to track these numbers through the ArticleHistory template. There would be a category:ArticleHistory by quality, and subcategories like ArticleHistory FA-Class articles. Could make this count FFAs too. Been thinking about this as we've gone over 1000 pages with ArticleHistory and I'm starting to see them edited incorrectly, possibly well-intentioned now, but eventually vandalism. The 1.0 bot would generate a log of all changes to class categories. Gimmetrow 05:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Re:Promoted facs
Hi! Thanks for the note. I did not know this automatic updating by GimmeBot. Thanks. I shall be aware! Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
A humble request
Hello Sandy. After all of your recent help with maintaining the FA status of The Quatermass Experiment and Quatermass and the Pit, I was wondering whether — if you happened to get the time, I know you're very busy! — you'd be able to cast your expert eyes over Nigel Kneale, which I have put up a peer review request for? It's an article I've worked quite hard on of late, and am very keen to take to FAC. As I said, I know you're already very busy and probably get snowed under with such requests, but I thought as one of the experts on what makes an FA I'd see if there was any way I could make use of your expert opinion. Many thanks. Angmering 22:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's okay, no problem! Going somewhere nice, I hope? :-) Angmering 22:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Gosh, thank you! I hope it's not too dull a piece of travel reading for you! Angmering 11:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
St. Petersburg, Russia
I have been a real idiot in that FAC. I appologize. If you feel it must be removed from FAC asap. please feel free to do so. --Parker007 00:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Follow up
Dear Sandy,
As you have been incredibly helpful with improving the references for the Ohio Wesleyan University article, I wanted to check in again and ask you for your opinion before I finally nominate the article. Do you think the references need more work? Or any other part of the article? Thank you so much again!!! LaSaltarella 04:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Houston
Sandy, if you get time to reread this article, which has had a lot of work done, please do so, in particular because you often check areas that I don't. Thanks. KP Botany 19:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Thor Halversson
The Campus Watch thing (pasted from a blogsite that evidently manipulates the article and, amazingly, one run by holocause deniers called http://www.fpp.co.uk/) is confusing and adds nothing to the entry for Halversson. I agree with JSRP it should not be in the article.
Most deserved
|
The Reviewers Award | |
| I, Dwaipayan, hereby award you the Reviewers Award for your contributions to reviews in FAC, FAR and other similar areas. Your work is inspiring! --Dwaipayan (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC) |
Restoration Literature
I feel Restoration literature needs to go to FARC for reasons I listed on the review page. — Deckiller 12:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Featured article categories
Why did you revert my edit to WP:FA? Yes, paracetamol is a medicine, but you could easily expand the definition to Baby Gender Mentor, Caffeine, Enzyme, Enzyme inhibitor and Enzyme kinetics, as they all have medical qualities to them. Paracetamol could easily fit in either section; it's a drug used by doctors, but all drugs are chemicals made by chemists. I put it in the chemical section, with the other chemicals, as I felt the biology and "MEDICAL" section was bloated and it got lost in there, in spite of a better reason - Jack · talk · 17:05, Thursday, 22 February 2007